Ben Habib was MEP for London for the Brexit Party until 31 Jan 2020. He is Chairman of Brexit Watch and CEO of First Property Group Plc

If World War 2 is a suitable analogy for the Covid-19 pandemic engulfing the UK, the Prime Minister’s announcement on 10 May perhaps represented the retreat of our troops towards Dunkirk. Hitherto, the war fought against the virus has had all the hallmarks of the opening phases of the last World War.

The UK was caught off guard and unprepared. It has thus far waged a somewhat confused and incoherent battle. The lack of preparedness can perhaps be forgiven; the pandemic emerged with little warning and spread rapidly. But, once the war started, it could and should have been fought quite differently.

A different approach was needed

First and foremost the government should have taken the virus seriously. It plainly did not or else it would have set about procuring medical equipment and test kits. It would have immediately taken steps at least to monitor the health of people flying into the UK (most notably from China and Italy). And most importantly it would have taken steps to protect the vulnerable and elderly.

There was much less known about the virus in the opening salvos but what was pretty clear was that it effected the elderly and people with pre-existing medical conditions much more so than anyone else. Instead of instantly moving to protect care homes, the elderly were in fact discharged from hospital, without being tested, into care homes to make bed space available; thereby taking the virus to the heart of those most vulnerable. Official death statistics now evidence this grim fact with 87% of UK deaths being of people over the age 65 years.

Imperial College’s modelling panic

Then there was the infamous Imperial College report forecasting that over 500,000 people would die of the virus if left unchecked. That panicked the government into extreme action locking down the country at vast cost in both human and economic terms. To achieve compliance with the lockdown the government put the fear of God into the populace. This fear runs deep across the country and is bound to make it extremely difficult for the government to reverse lockdown.

But still the government failed to take adequate steps to control flights into the UK. Still it claimed that testing, tracking and tracing the virus was not a sensible course of action. Still the elderly were not adequately protected.

Notwithstanding the large number of deaths in the UK the lockdown had the desired effect of reducing the number of infections and freeing up significant capacity at the NHS. The NHS now also has much larger supplies of personal protective equipment.

Loosening the lockdown?

So, when we were told that the Prime Minister would be announcing measures for a loosening of the lockdown on 10 May, many hoped and prayed that now, armed with empirical evidence and surplus capacity in the NHS, the government would take concrete steps to protect the vulnerable and elderly and otherwise open the economy to the fullest extent possible, albeit with in-built social distancing measures.

Too little, too late

We were sadly disappointed. It seems that the sense of panic which prompted the lockdown persists. The only parts of the economy due to be immediately “opened” are those involved in food production, construction, manufacturing, logistics, distribution and scientific research. Most of these were, in any event, operating during the lockdown. Crucially, even though the UK is a consumer led economy, it was made clear that “non-essential” parts of the economy would remain closed until at least July. By then the UK’s lockdown would have been in place for almost a quarter of a year. The cost of this lockdown was always going to be vast but it is now going to be much greater than need have been the case.

Evidencing recognition of its initially flawed response, the government it is now at last seeking to test, track and trace. It is also going to quarantine travellers to the UK for a period of 14 days. For a pessimist, gates, horses and bolted might come to mind but we should be delighted they are now taking these measures.

This is not a war

We must, however, be very concerned by the government’s mission creep. When the lockdown was instituted the Prime Minister made it clear that the aim was to squash the peak of the virus. Stay home, protect the NHS and save lives was the slogan. The (correct) implication of this was that, once the peak was squashed, the UK would get back to business.

For some reason, the aim now, as expressed by both the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition over the last two days, is to defeat the virus. The reality is that this is not a war. Absent a vaccine the virus cannot be defeated. We must learn to live with it. Therein lies the rub. How could we possibly live with it given the deep fear we have of it?

We must get back to work

A key component is government messaging. It has to change. Instead of using military metaphors and cowing the populace into compliance the government needs to be frank. It needs to make it abundantly clear that this is a virus which cannot be defeated. But that its effects need not be as pernicious as feared. It very largely only kills those with pre-existing medical conditions and the elderly. The government must set out effective measures to protect these people. And for the rest of us, it must institute regulations for suitable social distancing measures within the workplace, retail and leisure settings – and get us back to work!

Government messaging must be frank, clear and purposeful. Military metaphors, as helpful as they are in the art of politics, are deeply unhelpful in the context of the virus. The word “defeat” must be banished. Equally, suggesting people “Stay Alert” adds nothing to anyone’s understanding of the virus or how it should be handled. The virus is not a terrorist threat.

Only with an honest and frank assessment of the risks of the virus alongside balanced and sensible protective measures will the government be able to carry the nation with it and safely unlock the country. It urgently needs to do so.

Mr Habib writes here in his personal capacity

Observations

As regular readers know, from time to time we invite politicians and commentators to write articles for us. We are grateful to Ben Habib for this contribution to the debate on the Covid-19 lockdown.

Mr Habib is Chief Executive of First Property Group plc, a commercial property investment and fund management company. In May 2019 he stood as a candidate for the Brexit Party in the London constituency of the EU Parliamentary elections, which he won comfortably. He served until the technical departure of the UK from the EU on 31 January 2020. In the past Mr Habib had been a Conservative Party supporter and donor.

At the EU Parliament he was a member of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs.

The Company which Ben Habib founded, First Property Group Plc, is active in the United Kingdom, as well as in two EU countries: Poland and Romania.

[ Sources: Ben Habib | First Property Group Plc ] Politicians and journalists can contact us for details, as ever.

Since before the EU Referendum, we have been the largest researcher and publisher of Brexit facts in the world.

Supported by MPs, MEPs, & other groups, our work has impact.

We think facts matter.
Please donate today, so that we can continue to ensure a clean Brexit is finally delivered.

Any credit card user

Quick One-off

From £5 - £1,000

Monthly

From £3 per month

Paypal Users Only - Choose amount first

Quick One-off

Monthly

PLEASE NOTE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT : You can write your comment under any existing comments below. After you have clicked to preview your comment, you MUST then click on the CAPTCHA system and send you comment, for it to be published. Thank you!

Reader Comments 15

1. Lisa, Sheffield , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 06:57:

Very interesting read, thank you!

2. Greg, Leeds , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 07:24:

Agreed. The lockdown needs to come to an end ASAP. We're still seriously underestimating the price we're paying (both in lives and livelihoods) for this illusion of safety.

3. Harry C , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 09:08:

If the government carries on like this, keeping the lockdown whilst giving out unearned money it will cause a very long lasting devastating effect in our economy. We seemed to care so much about young people during Brexit, but now when that doesn't suit our agenda so well, we simply stopped caring. Current politics is all about constant manipulation of emotions in quite a stomach-turning fashion. Good on Ben Habib for speaking out.

4. Robert, Grimsby , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 09:12:

I don't want the lockdown to end! Now I'm so used to spending my days wearing my pyjamas and wandering around my flat aimlessly or watching movies for the fourth time and getting 80% of my salary. I just hope that bars will reopen soon so that I can spend the money I didn't actually work for.

5. Tom N, Dartmouth , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 09:16:

Refreshing point of view from Ben Habib. Recommended read.

6. Not4EU, London , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 09:43:

Control by fear is a powerful weapon & is the key weapon used by tyrannies. It seems to be increasingly employed in this country. It's also interesting to note that there appears to be a strong correlation between those who are fearful as well as those in power wanting the lockdown to continue until all risk has been eliminated (to deliberately destroy the country?) and those who want to overturn the referendum decision & return to the control of the EU.
The constant moving of the goalposts, along with the constantly pumped out mantra that 'this is the new normal', indicates that there is social engineering at its heart. There is even a man in Cabinet responsible for this who also sits on SAGE. It has also provided for the opportunistic & unquestioned implementation of economy destroying 'green' (Agenda 21/2030) policies so beloved of the EU as well as the excuse taken to spray more taxpayers money to the ponzi-scheme EU in the name of 'virus & vaccine research'.
The end result certainly appears to be compulsory vaccination, & the UK Govt (via senior Snivel Serpents) still appears to be enthralled in siding with the EU at every opportunity. How will they achieve that? Control of activities unless you have a certificate of vaccination. The EU already have plans for controlling movement unless you are vaccinated...https://ec.europa.eu/health...
and there's voices currently in the UK implying that children should not be allowed to school & workers unless they've received a vaccination.
Anyone might think that it's all been planned.

7. L Jones , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 14:35:

Comment 6. Yes, indeed it does all seem planned. I used not to give much credence to conspiracy theories - but now, worryingly, many of them seem to ring true. I've even begun to be careful what I say online, even though it seems quite innocuous! Yes, control by fear is certainly powerful control, just tempered with a bit of optimism. Each day that goes by I'm reminded of the quotation:
“Hopeful people are more easily controlled, but the volume must be managed. Too much hope leaves a person emboldened and resistant. Too little leaves them disabled and useless. But just the right amount of hope subjugates them. They cradle it like a dying ember, and they'll do anything to keep the wind from extinguishing it. They'll serve.”
And so we're being fed that little bit of hope at each stage. In the beginning it was - ''this is just till the NHS has time to get its act together'' - then ''just in case there's a second spike'' - then it'll be ''well, it's autumn now, and the flu season will begin soon, so.....'' Drip, drip, drip.

8. Mr O Jonasar , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 18:53:

Regardless, the lockdown can’t carry on indefinitely; for those furloughed, that money given to you is effectively being loaned to you. The government (any government) gets its money from the citizens of its country through taxes; therefore the money that is being given to furloughed staff will come from its country’s citizens from what they earn or what they are going to earn. Put another way, that money will be taken back - our taxes are going up.

9. Zerren Yeoville , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 23:06:

People on furlough are having a taste of what it would have like to have been a member of the leisured aristocratic class - a guaranteed income (at other peoples' expense) coming in every month that you don't have to lift a finger for (or even get out of bed for), while your days are yours to do as you please (within your home anyway).
The thing is, they like it, and are remembering the bitter old joke about 'if work was so wonderful the rich would have kept it to themselves.'
All those millions of people who dread Monday mornings, who hate their tedious dead-end low-status jobs, or who work for bullying bosses or with obnoxious colleagues - these are the people who are driving the lockdown support, simply because they are rather enjoying being paid 80% of their salary to stay home and potter about all day not doing very much, and are in no hurry to exchange that for going back to work, eight hours a day, five days a week, and all the stress and hassle, just for the sake of earning that extra 20%, which mainly either goes in tax or gets spent on subsidising the hidden costs of their job anyway (commuting costs, dry-cleaning office suits, takeaway coffees and sandwiches, whip-round collections for colleagues leaving / getting married / having babies, etc).
At the back of their minds they may realise it's not sustainable for long, but they shrug and think 'yeah, well, it's out of my hands anyway so just make the most of it while it lasts.'